Date of filing : 16-02-2011
Date of order : 08-02-2012
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.249/2011
Dated this, the 8th day of February 2012
PRESENT
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER
SMT. K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
1. Sheeba Basheer, Principal, } Complainants
Noorul Hudha English Medium School,
Kottikulam, Po. Bekal, Kasaragod. 671318.
2. President
Noorul Hudha English Medium School,
Kottikulam, Po. Bekal, Kasaragod. 671318.
The Manager, } Opposite parties
United India Insurance Company Ltd,
Kanhangad Branch, Nithyananda Building,
Main Road, Kottachery, Kanhangad. 671315.
(Adv. C. Damodaran, Kasaragod)
O R D E R
SMT.K.G.BEENA, MEMBER
This complaint is filed alleging deficiency of service on the part of opposite party in accepting the premium twice in a year for the same vehicle during the currency of the policy.
2. According to the opposite party if one policy is issued, the payment of premium for the same vehicle during the currency of the policy for the 2nd time will be rejected by the system as the system will show the existence of one policy.
3. The facts of this case is that the school bus of Noorul Hudha English Medium School KL-60-70 was insured with opposite party. The premium from 2007 to 2010 was paid by the insurer directly. As the complainant not received the policy paper till22-09-2010 she paid the premium at Kanhangad branch. After that she came to know that insurance company has already paid the premium on 3-8-2010 before she paying the premium on 22-09-2010 while resulting the premium on 22-09-2010 at Kanhangad branch the system might have shown the double payment as the insurance company had already paid the premium on 3-8-2010. The complainant, Principal of Noorul Hudha English Medium School is alleging deficiency of service on the part of opposite party in accepting the premium 2nd time during the pendency of the policy. The payment of premium for the same vehicle during the currency of the policy for the second time will be rejected by the system as the system will show the existence of one policy. After remitting the 2nd policy complainant approached opposite party several times for the refund of the 2nd premium. But according to opposite party refund of the premium in case of double Insurance is not possible in respect of the expired policy as the system does not allow any such refund.
4. While perusing the materials on record we are of the view that due to the deficiency of service on the part of opposite party, complainant undergone unlawful loss and mental agony. If the opposite party taken proper care at the time of accepting 2nd premium on 22-09-2010, double payment can be avoided. Ext.B3 is sufficient to prove the deficiency of service on the part of opposite party. In their version opposite party stated that if one policy is issued, the payment of premium for the same vehicle during the currency of the policy for the 2nd time will be rejected by the system, as the system will show the existence of one policy.
In the result, complaint is allowed and opposite party is directed to refund the excess payment made on 22-09-2010, i.e. `12,297/- with a cost of `2000/- within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which 9% interest shall be charged to `12,297/- from 22-09-2010 to till payment.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
B1 to B3 . Photocopy of policies.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pj/ Forwarded by Order
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
